Usually, in the third section of an article we describe the type of data , source of data, data analysis, etc. The question is: Is this method or methodology section? Or when we can use either of these two. I see that scholars using these two terms interchangeably, which should not be the case. I have red some documents here and there, it is still blurry to me. I prefer to use method to be in the safe side. Can anybody explain it in a very simple term, please?
Sure. "Methods" are more specific. How did you collect data? How did you analyze it? While "Methodology" implies a broader ontology. Is your work interpretivist/constructivist? reductionist? critical? Often, a methodology places constraints on methods, so they're closely related. But I think most articles report "methods" while the methodology is implicit or, in some journals, taken for granted.
Thank you Robert. . I checked many papers and I am confused. For example, I checked some papers in ASQ, I see these articles label the third section as method. But R&D Management articles use both method and methodology including the same discussion.
The terms are often used and understood interchangeably. I would consider it a very minor mistake. I haven't checked, but I wouldn't be surprised if I were guilty of mistaking "methods" and "methodology" myself. But the distinction is real.
I also used both and now feel using methodology was not an appropriate choice as I did not have discussion on philosophical issues. Thank you Robert !!
- Badges
- Science topic